formersnag, is it sustainable?

Well forest is, but the politics is not, and eventually the noisy minority will make life so miserable for everyone else, that you might as well let them have the win.

We have already seen that a minority party like the greens can make life miserable for the majority.

The eco types in Tasmania have declared they will not stop till the industry is defeated, they are not going to live and let live, it is who they are are .. they are anti loggers, it is their identity.

Is it worth fighting for what is essentially the woodchip industry, on principle .. so that a few can have a career and an income?

Is it going to take some deaths to change this? These people are fanatical, and regardless of the law, they are never jailed or held to account for what they do, so in effect, there is no law to stop them defying the forestry industry.

Do we really need the money?

Stop the industry, let the foresters go elsewhere in Australia, or have the government just pay them out for the rest of their lives with the salary they are on now with CPI increases.

The ALP seem able to spray money around like confetti, after all, it is only taxpayer's money and there's more if you are prepared to dig into other people's wallets, futures and savings.

To me this is like the Israeli/Palestinian thing, no solution short of something radical .. the only available radical thing, is to give up the forestry work .. I hate giving in to bully's, and the eco types are bully's, but what's the price to the rest of us, to the rest of the Tasmanian community if we continue this way.

Tasmanians have shown they don't want to stop the eco types, they voted back the Labor government who formed a coalition with the Greens, exactly what they said they would not do .. so maybe they deserve what they get, no industry and no future except a welfare state for the majority.

Here's an idea. Let's have a referendum on whether Tasmania should be funded by the rest of Australia while it deliberately reduces it's contribution to Australia's GDP and increases, disproportionately, it's reliance on Federal Government Funding.

Regrowth forest will never produce the giant swamp gums that tourists love. Take a look at the happy snaps of Tasmania embedded in Google Earth. You don't see people standing in front of plantation trees. Even if regrowth was stopped humans may never again see 100m tall flowering trees with the current warming trend. The burnoffs even 40 years ago removed a lot of the soil carbon which could take centuries to re-accumulate. Those really big trees are in places like the Styx, Weld and Florentine Valleys, outside the park area. I have some equally good suggestions for mainlanders
1) bulldoze Sydney Opera House and replace it with a block of flats
2) build a chairlift up the side of Uluru.

Some here obviously don't get the idea of sustainability. When WA iron ore and Queensland coal has been dug up and converted back to rust and atmospheric CO2 what can they flog next? Those States are living off their natural capital not the interest. Not too many years from now sustainable Tassie might have to bail them out.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12528#216627

Amicus, Au contraire, why not keep fighting the econazis? The Maoists will not stop until every industry other than "quarrying for China" is dead.

In QLD when Krudd is the last man standing, he will join the DLP &/or Bob Katter's Australian party. By then every sheeple will know that the entire RED/green, getup, GAYLP/alp, Socialist Alliance are Closet Communists. Their combined vote will drop below 10% & unelectability.

My personal prediction for the most likely outcome, is that before that happens those few moderates or NON communists left in the party will wake up, cross the floor & support minority LNP governments in all states, territories & federally before electoral armageddon wipes them out, completely.

i could be wrong but will be happy with either outcome.

BTW, the conservative parties could always push for a royal commission on Closet Communism, a senate committee on UN australian activities. No australian child will be safe until it happens.

Why not kick the bullies when they are down?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12528#216633

imajulianutter, correct, i find it wonderful irony that they work assiduaously to destroy every industry but will complain about importation of NZ apples.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12528#216625

cinders, great comment, don't expect the econazis to reply coherantly, they don't like "inconvenient truths".

i would be interested to see former Democrat's senator Norm Sanders reply to this article on OLO. He used to be a manufacturer/supplier of wood fired stoves/fire places.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12528#216638

taswegian, you ought to know better than that.

Selective logging ignores the tallest oldest trees because they are full of wet/dry rot, borers, white ants, strangler figs, etc & are therefore "rubbish" timber trees anyway.

They take healthy "medium age" trees, nor do they need to burn, leaving the oldest trees behind means the birds, sugar gliders, etc keep their nest holes in the older trees & the saplings, seeds in soil sprout to produce the regrowth.

50 to 100 years later any econazi who can tell the difference between the regrowth & "virgin" forest is telling deliberate, premeditated lies.

Congratulations Mark. You are a lone rational voice in this debate. I admire the way you keep your cool among the insane solutions and distortions being heaped on us by the Green mob. It is a pity more of your professional forester colleagues are not prepared to raise their heads above the parapet. Let's hope that now we have seen the Greens exercise power (as opposed to simply advocating their ideals) Australians will see the wisdom in turning away from this destructive coalition with Labour and seek an alternative that meets the pluralist needs of a democratic society.
BTW, I think we can add "economic basket case" to the description of Tasmania as "a retirement village in a national park". Who do these people think should pay for Tasmania? Perhaps Jan Cameron and Graham Wood could buy out the state, build themselves castles at each end, turn the natives into serfs and stage medieval battles. Now that might just be a tourist attraction, though the last time that happened in merrie England they almost destroyed their forests. There may be a lesson there.